The law that is in the legislative language that is in this supplemental. Because i agree with our distinguished whip, mr. Hoyer, and others who have said there are two things happening here. One is we need to address the challenge, the humanitarian challenge. We need resources to do that for particular purposes, and we should do that in the supplemental. Another is to change the law which we shouldnt do in a supplemental. It is legislative legislating on an appropriations bill in a manner in which all kind of statements can be made which may be anecdotally significant but not significant in terms of the difference that they make a difference enough to change the law. And so when people talk about witnesses in one context or another, just saying something on the floor of the house, its interesting. But there should be hearings, if were going to change the law, there should be hearings where testimony can come forth, challenged, confirmed, whatever it may be. But a serious discussion worthy of the country that we are, worthy of the congress that passed the wilber force law which was a very bipartisan initiative, and i salute my republican colleagues who played such an Important Role in passing the bill. And that bill directed agencies of government to incorporate antitrafficking and Protection Measures for vulnerable populations, particularly women and children, into whether its postconflict or humanitarian Emergency Assistance and program activities, according to the law. There was a purpose for the law. With a phrase in an appropriations bill we want to undermine that purpose, thats not necessary to do here. Why does this belong in a bill where we are allocating resources to meet a humanitarian challenge that we have . Now, lets get to whats in the actual supplemental. I had hoped that we could work in a bipartisan way, and i thought thats the path we were on. The republican majority wanted to decrease the amount of resources and the amount of time. Well, thats commensurate. Its a lower amount of money in a shorter period of time, thats ok. But when you change what that money is for, then you are doing a disservice to the entire issue. Instead of providing adequate resources to meet the humanitarian needs, the immediate humanitarian needs largely of these children, that is just totally inadequate in this legislation in terms of its proportionality in the bill. Whether it does not it fails to provide any resources for Legal Assistance to these children to plead their case. They may have a legitimate cause for asylum Refugee Status to come into the United States or not. But they should be represented and they should be represented in a way that repatriates them back to their home country if they do not qualify in a way that is safe. This legislation does not do that. The American People are fair minded, they are wise, they are practical, they want to help but they want to do so in a way that is fair to everyone involved. They want to see the children. Theres not enough resources here to do that on the humanitarian side. They want us to honor who we are with due process for these children. This legislation does not do that. They want to have judges to quickly facilitate giving these people a hearing in addition to the representation that they should have due process. The bill does not. It tramples due process to rush terrified children back to the violence of their home countries. Thats not who we are as a country. And it also poses a particular dangetory children victims of Gang Violence and human danger to children victims of Gang Violence and human trafficking. Human trafficking. Its a global crisis. It is happening at our border. We have a bill to stop it. This legislation on the floor today weakens that and then a manner of distribution of funds and pause it of funds does not paucity of funds does not address the challenge. It takes us backward. Its hard to understand. Now, what we should be talking about is what mr. Tierney suggested, how do we help communities that are receiving these children into their communities and our country . Again, how do we help . This bill hurts. So in addition to this, we i guess the way you were able to get the votes for this bill, which is even opposed by people who are antiimmigration because its not bad enough, you had to sweeten the pie by having a followup bill that would only be taken up if enough of your members agreed to vote for this bad bill. Not hat, again, does address who we are as a country. We are a great country because we are a good country. As long ve said that ago as 200 years ago or longer. So let us be good and let us be great and let us do something that really was closer to what the republicans were talking about earlier in this discussion. It seems that in order to get more votes you had to make the ill worse. Worse the bill, the more votes on the republican side. No, lets find Common Ground in the middle where we can get the most votes to do the best possible job that we can do. It may not be every good thing that we would ideally like to do, but is a reasonable place to go forward and to honor what the National Catholic conference of bishops have talked about, where all the people of faith are urging us to do here in the congress of the United States. And that is, to honosly respect the dignity and honestly respect the diggity and worth of all these children, all of them children of god. I get mobbed for quoting what the bishops have said because it is so generous to the children. But lets give the children a fair shot. Lets do wetter better than this. You know this bill isnt going anywhere. So once again it is a waste of time. It is not a statement of values. It is a statement of meanness. With that i yield back the balance of my time. The speaker pro tempore the gentlewoman yields back. The gentleman from kentucky is recognized. Mr. Rogers may i inquire of the time remaining . The speaker pro tempore the gentleman from kentucky has 5 1 2 minutes. The gentlewoman from new york has nine minutes eight minutes. Mr. Rogers i reserve. The speaker pro tempore the entleman reserves. The gentlewoman from new york is recognized. Mrs. Lowey madam speaker, im pleased to yield three minutes to the gentleman from california, mr. Farr, the Ranking Member of the agricultural subcommittee of appropriations. The speaker pro tempore the gentleman from california is recognized for three minutes. Mr. Farr thank you, madam ranking chair, for yielding. I rise, madam speaker, on this bill with great concern. I feel bringing a lot of fashions to this debate because i lived in the barrios, like the ones children were coming from, when i was a peace corps volunteer in latin america. This is not a border crisis. This is not a Border Security issue. This is a humanitarian crisis. Its caused by problems on both sides of the border. Our country has a lot at fault here because we have not addressed comprehensive Immigration Reform, which means we have 11 Million People living in the United States undocumented. They are essentially incarcerated in this contry. They are not allowed to go home because the minute they go home and try to get back to the United States, they get arrested and they are not allowed to ever return. Or barred for 10 years to return. What happens . They have been living here for years and years. They have children that they left because there were Job Opportunities here. And those children are now living in places that are really dangerous. And all of a sudden, yeah, things have changed. They got to get out. These countries are ranked number one, four, and five of the highest murder rates in the world. Theyre leaving because there are real serious humanitarian crisis and they are showing up on our border and they are not sneaking across the board he border. They are throwing themselves, help me, help me find my relative, my dad, my parent, my mom in this country. What does this bill do . It doesnt address the humanitarian problems at either end. It hires more cops and puts military in there, National Guardsmen. If thats such a great idea, why is california, with probably the busiest border in the world with mexico, not putting the National Guard down there . Our governors and mayors dont think its necessary. Why are we putting more money for in for National Guard . We dont need National Guard we need red cross. Humanitarian crisis. Money for arms and more money for military and cops. I dont think thats the right answer. We are also doing some something really dumb. We are stripping a law now that says when we give money to these countries by the way, before you spend this money on your cops and military, you got to vet them. We have a human rights standard. This bill throws that out. You dont have to do that now. We are going to give you 40 million of american taxpayer money and you dont have to do anything to abide by human rights. Thats really dumb. I dont think american taxpayers want their money spent that way. You know, im going to call upon my colleagues here not to come down here and think of themselves in a partisan way or Election Year way. Come to this floor when you have to vote on this bill and think of yourself as a parent, as a neighbor. A kid whos knocked on your door and you go, say, oh, my god, shes crying anne, whats happened . My house, they are raping people and killing people and im running away. This bill says, oh, whats your address, ill take you home. Dont vote for it. The speaker pro tempore the gentlemans time has expired. The gentleman from kentucky is recognized. Mr. Rogers madam speaker, i yield two minutes to the gentleman from texas, mr. Cuellar. The speaker pro tempore the gentleman from texas is recognized for two minutes. Mr. Cuellar thank you, madam speaker. I support full comprehensive Immigration Reform, but todays vote on this supplemental appropriation bill is to provide funding to i. C. E. , border patrol, and other agencies to deal with the humanitarian crisis on the border, an area i represent, an area where i live, an area where 42,000 out of the 58,000 unaccompanied kids have crossed. The policy change in this bill is to get rid of a loophole in the 2008 law that the smugglers in Central America and mexico have taken advantage of. All due process and Legal Protections are left intact under this proposed bill. You will see under a c. R. S. Report that compares the current law to todays bill, you will see the same due process, the same Legal Protections are left intact. In fact, i respectfully ask my colleagues in opposition to show me specifically where theres due process and Legal Protection is taken away out of the bill. I yet have heard where it does this. I have also asked my colleagues in opposition respectfully to sit down with me and offer their alternative solution or their legislative proposal to this border crisis and have yet to hear those solutions. In this appropriation bill we have to provide the funding for the federal agencies to provide an orderly border. But we cannot no longer afford to play defense from the 1yearold called the u. S. Mexico border. We need to play defense on the 20yard line and this is why working with the Central American countries, working with mexico to address the core issues and to fix and fight the smugglers is vital. I want to thank the men and women on the border that have defended our homeland, and i want to thank the border communities and churches and nonprofits that have done so much to help this folks at the border. In fact, i want to thank the chairman for allowing a provision for the border communities to seek reimbursement for the allowable expenses under this bill. We cannot leave washington today without putting the resources and the policy changes to address the border crisis. We are sent here to address not the easy problems but to address the hard problems. John f. Kennedy mr. Rogers i yield another minute. The speaker pro tempore the gentleman is yielded another minute. Mr. Cuellar thank you, mr. Chairman. We are sent here to washington not to address the easy problems but to address the difficult problem that this nation is facing. When president john f. Kennedy was faced with a very difficult crisis, he said, im not looking for a republican answer or for a democratic answer, im looking for the right answer. And i think today in a bipartisan way we need to look for that right answer. I urge yes on this supplemental appropriation bill. I yield back the balance of my time. The speaker pro tempore the gentleladys time has expired. The gentleman from kentucky reserves. The gentlewoman from new york is recognized. Mrs. Lowey madam speaker, im pleased to yield two minutes to the gentlelady from california, ms. Lee, a member of the labor, health, and Human Services and foreign operations subcommittee. The speaker pro tempore the gentlewoman from california is recognized for two minutes. Ms. Lee thank you very much. Let me thank to our Ranking Member on approps, mrs. Lowey, for yielding and your steadfast leadership. Madam speaker, i rise in strong opposition to this woefully inadequate republican response to the humantarian crisis along our border. Let me start by saying that as an appropriator i am very troubled by the shameful inadequate funding levels and misguided offsets in this bill. Im also deeply concerned by the dangerous policy riders that strips protections for vulnerable children, protections signed into law by a republican president , mind you. Lets be clear. This crisis has nothing to do with the lack of funding for immigration enforcement. We dont do anything to help these children by pouring tax dollars into the further mill tarization of our border. And militarization of our border. Thats what this bill does. Our response needs to put children first. In a hearing this week we heard first hand from Central American children who had fled violence in their home countries and had passed through our broken detention system. These children and thousands like them risk their lives on their way to this country. Some have witnessed murders and Gang Violence in their home countries and suffered freezing conditions and inadequate nutrition while in detention in the United States. These stories were chilling and made clear where we need to direct our resources humane care, access to due process, and support to end the violence and poverty plaguing honduras, el salvador, and guatemala. No one disagrees with protecting our borders, but come on, we also have a duty to protect these children who, according to the United NationsHigh Commission on refugees, 60 of whom were interviewed, these children need international protection. My home district makes up alameda county, where over 200 of these children have been reunited with their families locally. Their stories are real. Their stories are very, very powerful. So i urge a no vote. Lets guarantee due process for these children who are fleeing violence. Lets have a heart. Thank you. The speaker pro tempore the gentleladys time has expired. The gentleman from kentucky virginia tech. Mr. Rogers may i inquire of the gentlelady from new york if she has further speakers . Im prepared to close. You have one additional speaker . Then i reserve. The speaker pro tempore the gentleman from kentucky reserves. The gentlewoman from new york is recognized. Madam speaker, ore i turn to my colleague ms. Lofgren from california, the Ranking Member, an expert on immigration, the subcommittee of the judiciary committee, i just want to make one statement again. The senate, after months of hearings, passed a bipartisan comprehensive Immigration Reform bill. It is really very sad that today we cant get together, democrats and republicans, and review the work that had been done by the senate and pass a comprehensive Immigration Reform bill that would have prevented the emergency that we are trying to address today. The majority of the bill that is included in this supplemental should have been done through a thoughtful committee process. So im very pleased to turn the balance of our time to mississippi lofgren, a member of the immigration judiciary committee. The speaker pro tempore the gentlewoman from california is recognized for the remaining two minutes. Ms. Lofgren madam speaker, the u. S. Conference of catholic bishops tells us this bill, quote, would result in the u. S. Sending children who have relief available to them back to the conditions they fled and will result in many children being harmed and some being killed on their return. I join the bishops in opposing this bill. With this bill, children whove been trafficked, whove fled persecution, violence and abuse will be stripped of protections that have existed for years. Our laws provide that victims of persecution and torture must have a meaningful opportunity to request safe haven. We need not prejudge the outcome of these cases. We need only adhere to these laws that ensure that each child is treated in a fair matter that their case be individually considered, and if they deserve protection under the law, so be it. If not go home. This is not new. Refugees have received protection in america for decades. In 1980, the asylum system that we have today was established. Most of the special protections for unaccompanied children were created in 1997. Many were codified in 2002, but critics of the antislavery law of 2008 claim it has caused the influx of kids to america. But the protections began in 1997, 17 years ago. No. Kids are fleeing because of the extreme violence in three countries. Children from other countries in the region are not fleei